Auto Throttles.

[DC-ATE]

Auto Throttles.

In the thread on the Turkish Airlines accident, there is a lot of discussion on auto throttles during the approach phase. I've never flown an aircraft with auto throttles, but have ridden in the back when they've been used. How do I know? The engines were forever 'hunting' to maintain speed. Most annoying. I could tell it made many passengers nervous.

When you guys/gals have the auto throttles engaged, what do you do with your right/left hand? Seems to me, without having your hand on the throttles, attention could be drawn away from your airspeed and just what the engines are doing. Seems like there's just too much reliance on auto throttles to perform the task that pilots have done themselves since the Wright Brothers.

But, I imagine all aircraft produced now-a-days come 'standard' with auto throttles. Is that right? I just think it's sad that more and more tasks are being taken away from the pilot leading to more and more problems. Next step is the drone for passenger carrying aircraft. Don't laugh.

OK.....let's hear how "ancient" my thoughts on this are.

[Green Cactus]

hold on to the auto throttle, while wondering what it's going to do next....

And no there's nothing subtle about it.

GC

edit: yes they move (luckily)

[EpsilonVaz]

On the last approach of a 4 sector day in gusty conditions, when you are told to "turn right heading 110degrees to establish on the localiser and intercept glideslope from above maintain 170kts to 5DME contact tower on 118.425 expect late landing clearence due to departing aircraft." You will be thankful for Auto Thrust, especially if you are a relatively inexperienced pilot like me.

On the note of system competence. I've only flown the A320 series, and unless its seriously gusty, it performs the job well. I don't think you can really judge how well the A/T is working by "sitting in the back". On approach, with A/T is engaged, it's SOP to keep your hand (left hand for me) on the Levers.

Unlike the Boeing, when the A320 is in A/T, the levers don't actually move, I found this quite strange at first, but quicky adapted. N1 is displayed on the upper ECAM, and airspeed on the PFD. The levers don't directly control the airpeed, so I'm not quite sure of the benifit of having your hands on moving levers and that being related to knowing your airspeed. You can "feel" and "hear" the aircraft engine power, which is an added bonus, but really, all of the information you need is provided to you in an efficient scan.

I don't think it's being "taken away", as on many days I enjoy a manual thrust approach, it's my choice. At the end of the day I must judge how much mental capacity I have, and if it is safe to take a particular course of action.

EpsilonVaz

[Rainboe]

When the A/T is engaged, never touch them! It is only when you fly with u/s A/T you realise what a boon it is. Always setting correct climb power for you, backing off power when you level, setting cruise power and maintaining it. When they are u/s, it actually becomes hazardous because you are varying between near clacker and near min buffet! You do lose continual situational awareness as you rely on it so much. Flying such a 747 back from BKK to LHR was very hard work! Are they worth it? Yes, a million times over! Takes away a very tedious task.

On approach, you can get hands on thrust levers, disconnect A/P and then do whatever your company does to the A/T. Safe, better monitoring and control of speed by the automatics, with warnings of speed discrepancy- what can be wrong with them? While they work!

[DC-ATE]

EpsilonVaz -
Unlike the Boeing, when the A320 is in A/T, the levers don't actually move, I found this quite strange at first, but quicky adapted.

I don't much like THAT idea at all; engines changing power and the throttles NOT moving. Guess I'm just too old fashined.

[I love twins]

On the airbus it's easiest to just think of the thrust levers as thrust limiters (with A/T engaged of course). Typically the thrust levers will be in the CLB detent from thrust reduction altitude until the flare. Obviously the thrust will vary throughout the flight but the levers will be stationary.
In manual thrust they work the same as any other aircraft.

I think some of the smaller Embraer aircraft do not have auto thrust installed but don't take that as gospel!

[bjkeates]

I don't much like THAT idea at all; engines changing power and the throttles NOT moving.

Why, out of interest? The gauges tell you what the engines are doing... you don't need a great big lever constantly moving backwards and forwards to confirm that.

I personally find it to be a great system.

[jb5000]

Guess I'm just too old fashined.

Quite.

:ugh:

[Capt Claret]

I fly the B717, my first type with auto throttle.

For approach, say from 1500' AAL or thereabouts, when configuring for landing is usually complete, my hand is on the throttles moving with it, and if it wants to reduce power due to low level wind effects and I don't want it to, I resist the movement.

On take off, once the auto pilot is engaged my hand comes off the throttle, and sits on my knee, ready to intervene if necessary.

I've never flown an aircraft with auto throttles, but have ridden in the back when they've been used. How do I know? The engines were forever 'hunting' to maintain speed. Most annoying. I could tell it made many passengers nervous.

In my observation the hunting is caused more by technique than "it's got auto throttle".

I believe that if the pilot was not flying with auto throttle, they would manage the approach so that as constant a power as possible was held whilst progressively configuring for landing, to minimise power/pitch couple changes. However, with auto throttle and auto pilot engaged, Bloggs doesn't have to worry about it, and some let the automatics take care of it.

I find that on the 717, reducing from 250 kias (with some descent power on) to 210 kias (Co. min clean), and then configuring as the desired speed is progressively reduced, keeps the power at idle until configured, and then there is one increase to maintain Vapp, not an increase as the machine captures the 4 speed targets with configuring.

[DC-ATE]

Well at least on your 717, it sounds like the throttles MOVE with power changes. Apparently, on the Airbus they don't.

And, yes..."Quite"...I am old fashioned. Piston-powered aircraft, and 'steam-powered' jet aircraft served me well for thirty years. I only hope all this new stuff gives you all the same results.

Thanks for the input.

[bjkeates]

Fair enough, DC-ATE...

...but you still haven't answered my question. What is it exactly about the non-moving thrust lever autothrust systems you don't like? Why is it? And what are these "more and more problems" to which you allude in your initial post? You haven't actually specified any, and there's no evidence yet that the 737 A/T system had anything to do with the Turkish crash.

I'm not having a go - just curious.

[CHfour]

DC-ATE,
As you can see, most of us like our auto throttles. I agree with what you say about more automation reducing handling skills but it also frees up a few neurons for other tasks. You were probably a better handling pilot than many of us these days but we probably have more traffic to dodge than you had so need to keep an eye on the TCAS. The A/T on th 733 is prety good and is said to be able to recognise wind shear earlier than a human but it doesn't always look that way. Getting back to the left/right hand, most pilots in my company guard the thrust levers at level off as sometimes one side can malfunction and cause a large split. The 73 will roll abruptly if this is not corrected as you will remember.

[DC-ATE]

bjkeates -
I just don't like the idea of engines changing settings without the throttles moving. Doesn't make sense...seems a little sppoky if you will. As someone has said the B-717 A/Ts move while engaged. I MIGHT be able to live with that.

And, I guess to say I don't like the idea isn't totally fair being as how I've never used them. All I can say is the idea does not appeal to me.

I guess I'm just one of those that wants to "be in control" all the time.:8

You're right, we don't know.....yet.....if auto throttles have played a part in recent accidents or not.
-------------------------
CHfour -
I can see by the replies that "most" of you like your auto throttles. But, I'm affraid that you could put any airplane equipped in any manner in front of many pilots and they'd fly it anyway. That's another reason why pay scales keep going down, but that's another topic!

As to your....."sometimes one side can malfunction and cause a large split."

Ah ha.....you admit something can and does go wrong with them. See, I told ya so!:}


OK.....again folks, thanks for the feed back. You all be careful out there.

[Junkflyer]

The moving throttles give you a sensory input through your hand on what is happening with the power setting and keeps you more in the loop.

[DC-ATE]

Let me add one more thing if I may.

The following link applies to automation in general (not just auto throttles) in today's cockpits.

While I realize automation is here to stay, it doesn't necessarily mean it is safer than what we had before.

Phase 1 Report - Flight Deck Automation Issues (http://www.flightdeckautomation.com/phase1/phase1report.aspx)

[411A]

The moving throttles give you a sensory input through your hand on what is happening with the power setting and keeps you more in the loop.
Quite...and well worthwhile, IMO.
The autothrust on the 'ole L1011 is the same, and very accurate, without excessive throttle 'hunting'.
A superb arrangement...and oddly enough, I have never had it fail to function as advertised.
Combined with DLC, an unbeatable combination.

[A Comfy Chair]

DC-ATE,

If 411A is saying something "modern" in terms of an Autothrottle is good, it must be pretty damn good!

I find Airbus' decision to not have the thrust levers move an odd one, but plenty of people around the world fly them and have no issues.

The 767 has moving thrust levers and does a pretty good job, esp as a speed protection function. Its a little more agracultural than some would like, but when all said and done it does a pretty good job!

[c100driver]

DC-ATE

While I realize automation is here to stay, it doesn't necessarily mean it is safer than what we had before.

Well I beg to differ on that, if you compare the accident rate 20 to 30 years ago verse the last 10 years. Also remeber the number of jet transport aircraft has almost doubled since 1990 yet the accident rate has still dropped.

I cut my first 15 years flying out on very basic B732 (no auto thrust, no FMC, no Alt Cap on the A/P, no thrust computer) and F27 aircraft. The last 10 on a B733 with everything and I feel my management of flight is far superior than the good old days of "stick and rudder". I make better decisions and use less fuel with help from the automatics. Understanding what the aircraft is capable of and how to best manage the autoflight to achieve that is the key.

[411A]

Understanding what the aircraft is capable of and how to best manage the autoflight to achieve that is the key.

Yup, would agree.
When the FMS made its appearance on the TriStar, it was a huge improvement in flight management.
Full LNAV/VNAV and full time engine thrust management in a neat package.
Even today, it still works as advertised.

[extreme P]

"Without belaboring a point, which is probably obvious to the reader, there are two features of the B-757/767 aircraft (and shared, of course, the B-747 and the B-777) which enable these airplanes to achieve the greatest benefit from the fuel-efficient engines and aerodynamic efficiencies These are (1) a computer which is able to perform complex cruise calculations and (2) an autoflight system, including autothrottle, which is able to translate the cruise calculations precisely.
The first-generation of turbojet transports such as the DC-8 and B-707 did not have autothrottles. If a pilot attempted to operate at maximum range cruise, it would be counter-productive due to the inherent instability at these speeds and the constant attention demanded of the pilot to thrust manage- ment. As a result, the "practical" minimum speed for these airplanes was Long Range Cruise (defined as 99% best economy). The fact is that flight manuals didn't even publish data for speeds less than LRC.

Second generation airplanes, such as the B-747, while incorporating an autothrottle system, were still unable to operate at maximum range cruise due to inherent inefficiencies of the autothrottle system. The automatic system operated the fuel controller though the same linkage used by the throttle levers in the cockpit. The system was difficult to maintain and thrust overshoots and undershoots were common. Much of the time at cruise was spent manually aligning the throttles. The practical minimum speed remained LRC.
The767-200 and the RB211 version of the 757 permit the fuel controller to change engine thrust through a pre-determined range without back driving the throttles. Although the system is still hydro-mechanical, more precise control of cruise is possible. Finally, with the advent of the true fly-by-wire system found on the B-747-400, 777, 767-300 and the Pratt & Whitney version of the 757, almost flawless control of the engines is possible. Speeds from Max Lift/Drag to the Vmo are fully usable."

[fc101]

I think some of the smaller Embraer aircraft do not have auto thrust installed but don't take that as gospel!

Not on our E145s, though it is an option I understand

fc101
E145

[DC-ATE]

OK.....again, thank you for your replies.

As I said in a post somewhere....."You boys stick with your new fangled toys and I'll stick with my needle/ball and airspeed and hopefully, we'll all get to wherever it is we're going!"

I'll add to that: My manual throttles and 'steam-powered' gauges too!

Gee...you don't think I'm a little stubborn and close-minded, do you?!:}

[CHfour]

DC-ATE,
I can see by the replies that "most" of you like your auto throttles. But, I'm affraid that you could put any airplane equipped in any manner in front of many pilots and they'd fly it anyway. That's another reason why pay scales keep going down, but that's another topic!

Not sure I follow the bit about pay. More automation lessens piloting skills which surely lessens the appeal of the job. The less interesting the job becomes, the less people will offer to do it for next to nothing (or even pay for the RH seat). Add to that the fact that passengers want to fly for nothing these days..........................

[DC-ATE]

CHfour -

Well, you know as well as I do that there are thousands of "pilots" out there who would almost fly for nothing just to fly. And to get with an airline, they'll even PAY to do it. "Kids" coming along now days probably DO find it interesting and appealing mainly because all it is now is a computer game. They really don't have to know much about anything except how to program the computer to get them from point A to point B. Sad.....

[airfoilmod]

I was too old to fly the line when I sorted out my career love. I'm one of those who would fly for free, just to fly. I draw the line at paying to fly, that's too needy. I stay away from the B vs. AB threads, way too ignorant other than my prehistoric skills and prejudices. I admit to being partisan, though, and DC-ATE has my vote. Training to fly a digital Beast neglects Some of Wolfgang's dogma?, a loss, in my opinion. I like DME with its built in altitude gotcha, because it makes one think and reason. Not to say that the little stick isn't a valid alternative, just a different, and very sophisticated platform. The Trend is toward complete machine dependence, the Drone is approaching. Along the way is a forever lost Spatial awareness/dependence; I listen to my Butt cheeks in a turn; rather than read digits. Just sayin'.

AF

[DC-ATE]

airfoilmod (http://www.pprune.org/members/224430-airfoilmod)

Thank you for your support!

Speaking of B vs AB:

You know...it's funny: I "flew by cable" for thirty years. I've been retired for almost twenty years. In that time, I've "flown by wire" only. That is to say, on a Flight Sim with joystick and keyboard. So, while I don't have as many hours on the sim as in real aircraft, I do have a little "feel" for FBW. Fortunately though, if there's a power outage or computer problem, myself and my "passengers" are not in jeopardy!

[bjkeates]

They really don't have to know much about anything except how to program the computer to get them from point A to point B.

I'm 24 and fly the Airbus for a living - does that make me one of the 'kids' to whom you refer? I find that post a little condescending to be honest. Why did I bother spending 2 1/2 years training - and still learning from my experiences all the time - when I could have just used Flight Sim to teach me to programme a box? Wish I'd thought of that...

That is to say, on a Flight Sim with joystick and keyboard. So, while I don't have as many hours on the sim as in real aircraft, I do have a little "feel" for FBW.

Are you seriously suggesting that spending a few hours on FS gives you the feel for FBW, or even comes close to replicating the handling characteristics of the real aeroplane?!

[DC-ATE]

bjkeates -

I'm sorry if I seemed a little harsh. It was not directed at any one person. It was a generalization from what I've seen, heard, and read. Obviously, it can't and doesn't apply to everyone. The same as "my generation" was not always infallible either. As I have often said, sadly, probably well over 80% of all aircraft accidents can be traced to "pilot error" in one way or another.

If you will note...I put the word "feel" in quotes talking about the Flight Sim. There has to be a little similarity there however.

I do wish you well in your career. Just don't let that computer always tell you what to do. Stay in the loop. I flew the 737-300 briefly with its 'glass cockpit' and have seen what it does to some. They become too dependent on the computer to solve their problems.

Carry lots of fuel, avoid TRWs at all costs, and add a minimum of ten knots to everything and you'll do just fine!

[CHfour]

Carry lots of fuel, avoid TRWs at all costs, and add a minimum of ten knots to everything and you'll do just fine!

Not necessarily, DC. Extra fuel isn't tolerated these days without a good reason and the extra 10 kts minimum might attract a call from your company OPTIC man (or woman).
BTW what are TRWs?

[DC-ATE]

CHfour (http://www.pprune.org/members/136784-chfour)

With all due respect, Sir, if you don't know what TRWs are, then perhaps you shouldn't be flying airplanes, if you do.

As to the extra fuel, there are countless reasons and if you're a pilot then you know what they are. I have never worried about being called into the office on my 'conservative' approach to flying airplanes. I think I know what I'm talking about.....do you?

[bjkeates]

add a minimum of ten knots to everything and you'll do just fine!Thanks for your good wishes. I don't think, however, that my company's FDM team will take "some bloke on PPrune told me to do it" as an excuse for repeatedly busting stable approach parameters, nor do I like to modify the target speeds just for the hell of it! Those millions of pounds worth of computers have done their job just fine so far!

[DC-ATE]

bjkeates (http://www.pprune.org/members/136029-bjkeates)

You're welcome.....and, I meant it!

Like everything else related to flying, you must have a reason for doing what you do. I always had a reason for my extra fuel and knots. It wasn't arbitrary. As you gain experience, you'll find out. I only hope it isn't too late. And, you can't worry about what someone else might say.....IF you think you're doing the right thing.

A good example of an extra ten knots would be the AA 191 accident in O'Hare. Had the Captain not REDUCED to V2+10 (or whatever their engine-out speed was supposed to be) they most likely would have been able to return and land. That wasn't the only thing that went wrong though.

Anyway, we digress.

Enjoy!

[Denti]

Just adding 10 knots to everything will not only get the companies safety department on your behind very fast indeed (in fact, you will bust your line release check), but the authority as well as it can and will breach the certified performance for a plane.

And quite a lot of extra every single flight will in some companies get you fired very soon and in others get you into another week of fuel saving training nowadays. Remember, FOQA catches everything you do on board and all the rest is put into computers as well and will be noticed.

And by the way, what is TRW?

[Rananim]

DC-ATE,
Dont bother trying to explain.These new guys are a totally different breed.Computer junkies who would ground the aircraft without an FMC or AT.Not only can they not fly a damn without the AFDS,they're pretty cocky too(this pseudo-CRM bs)...2 1/2 years on the scarebus and think they know it all.TRW?Look it up sonny..you never know you may learn something.

[EpsilonVaz]

I can imagine myself getting grounded very quickly if I just decide to add 10kts on to everything the computer has quite competently calculated. Also, as mentioned before, company flightplans generally add alot of extra, if you have a reason to take extra fuel, no problem, but you can't just add more for the hell of it.

By the way, what's a TRW?

[rogerg]

With all due respect, Sir, if you don't know what TRWs are, then perhaps you shouldn't be flying airplanes, if you do.

I have over 20000 hrs , FBC and FBW, and I dont know what TWRs are?

[Flaperon777]

Been flying a commercial jet before i could legally buy a beer.And about the same time as I could drive a car!
A decent ILS or CANPA approach flown 'manually' ie without an A/P or A/T is probably the most economical approach,besides being a very comfortable one( both for the PM and the invaluable passenger,who pays for the bread on out tables ).When i say 'flown manually',I of course mean flown manually by a competent pilot with average flying skills.My first airplane as PIC was the 732.And I think I have still to experience a similar joy of flying.Never spilt a drop off of the full coffee mug we sipped during our landings.And then,ever since its been the 733,734,735,320,321,738,739,739ER,300-600R,744 and now the 777(all versions).All as PIC.And most as a trainer.DC-ATE said he felt uncomfortable due to the constant hunting of the engines.SURE,he's damn right.I FOR ONE feel the same...!! He must be sitting in a 777! Whilst I can confidently say that the 777 IS god's gift to the pilot,it does have its quirks.The 734 had 22k engines,320-24k,738-26k,744-53k.But the 777 has 115K GIANTS for engines my friend! Imagine a less than perfect pilot flying a manual(no A/P but WITH A/T) ILS in less than perfect conditions in a 733/4.And then imagine the same in a 777.Engine respone to his imperfections in terms of pitch adjustments and/or speed loss and gain would be far far quicker in the 733 than in the 777.Mass of airplane AND engine bypass ratio and therby engine response/spool up time alone will dictate that agility of the A/T system in correcting the anomaly,therby minimising the need to constantly 'hunt' for the desired speed/pitch.
Now,couple the same A/T with the A/P on both airplanes.You will notice a WORLD of a difference.No hunting,no lagging.Cause the same computers that give the input to the A/P to follow an ILS for example,give the same input to both the A/T's via the EEC's within the same nano second!No discrepancy,no lag,and no hunt.....!! Net result pax comfort and a PM with lower BP after touchdown.
Wanna do a great job of smoothening out your slight imperfections on the ILS?? Fly the manual approach WITHOUT the A/T.Use manual thrust instead.You'll notice a marked improvement.But as soon as you go automatic,use FULL automatics and revert to your role as 'Manager'. Leave the 'Pilot' at home.
That's the trick I try and use as often as I can.Unfortunately my company SOP's dictate the use of the 777 A/T system.And I shan't argue with that ever! Follow the SOP's to the T and you shall live to be the cliched 'Old,bold pilot'.....Now THAT'S my mantra for you guys out there.
And watch those BRT's for bird ingestion(s)......!! ;) ...

[airfoilmod]

Nothing personal, but the a/c in question possesses many of the Traits disdained by the twenty-somethings "flying it". Arrogant, Proven, Brook no deviations, No questions (My computers are quite competent, thank you.)
"I have three ways to fly, get right with that, etc." It is that regimen that irks those who flew before the digital age. Not having experienced that, youngsters compare seasoned flyers with their a/c, one approvingly, one disdainfully? If I were to fly with a Captain possessed of the (human) traits the Bus displays, I would not be comfortable, see?

AF

[DC-ATE]

I am utterly amazed that we have several pilots (supposedly) that do not know what a TRW is. Apperently they never check the weather before they take off into the unknown.

[DC-ATE]

Denti (http://www.pprune.org/members/29532-denti)

re. the +10: read what I wrote.

If you don't know what a TRW is, then I suspect you don't fly airplanes, or if you do, you don't check the weather.

[rogerg]

Will somebody just tell me what a TWR is. I suspect we may call it, whatever it is, something different over here.

[EpsilonVaz]

After googling, TRW is the american way of saying TS on a METAR/TAF.

...so yea, I know what a Thunderstorm is.

[DC-ATE]

It's TRW, not TWR. TWR might be an abreviation for Tower.

A TRW is a weather-related acronym that any pilot who has ever flown anywhere where it rains knows what it is. Or, he'd better.

It's a.....THUNDERSTORM W/ RAIN SHOWERS

Sometimes they're just shown as 'T'.

And if you don't respect them as a few have not, you will cause a fatal accident. Although, I hardly call it an accident if someone deliberately flies into one. Or, even NEAR one.

But.....we digress.

[AutoAbort]

Can't resist to ask what a TRW is?

Sorry for not knowing. But then I have only flown globally for 22 years on F27 to A340-500 so I am just a beginner with my 11000 hours I guess:}

AutoAbort

Too late again:confused:

[rogerg]

And me with my 20000hrs!

[Denti]

If you don't know what a TRW is, then I suspect you don't fly airplanes, or if you do, you don't check the weather.


Dunno, i fly for the last 24 years which is not all that long considering i have another 29 years until retirement, but over here we use ICAO and JAR abbreviations.

Oh, so i saw the posts above, TS for thunderstorm, RA for rain, SH for showers and it all can be combined.

[EpsilonVaz]

A TRW is a weather-related acronym that any pilot who has ever flown anywhere where it rains knows what it is. Or, he'd better.

Not my fault the FAA uses different METAR codes from the rest of the world(ICAO). I yield, I have never flown in the US. Just around Europe/North Africa.

[AutoAbort]

And by the way...I love automation, and still they consider me a decent stick and rudder pilot as well - very strange indeed;)

AA

[DC-ATE]

OK.....regarding TRWs.

METARS have changed the way weather is displayed. And I see it's different every where you go. That's just great for a 'global' operation! One more example where "they" have tried to make something better and have only made it worse. Of course, that's IMHO.

"They" really don't want you to know what the weather is. You might add more fuel or decide not to go.

Again.....we digress.

Keep your EPRs up.....or whatever they call those things today!

Edit for horrible spelling!

[airfoilmod]

AutoAbort, it used to be that to be known as a "good stick" was the highest compliment to gain. If your rep was somewhat less, "stick" was a word not included in banter about your skill. (see below for exception).



A "Decent Stick" meant you were RHS, and might have potential. It used to be bad form to talk about your skill or reputation, I blame Tom Cruise and Val Kilmer.
rgds.
AF

[CHfour]

DC-ATE,
Despite using the prefix "with all due respect", I have to admit I was a little offended by your recent reply to me, especially the part about the TRW. However, I now feel in quite good company as you seem to have insulted quite a number of highly experienced aviators. For your information, I do fly real aircraft (733s and 735s) for a UK LOCO and am no stranger to flight sim either ( I use it to brush up on those esential manual flying skills, though I've never managed to convince my wife or daughters that I'm not just "playing").

[DC-ATE]

CHfour (http://www.pprune.org/members/136784-chfour)

I am sorry I offended you. It is/was not my intention of offending anyone. I just felt that everyone would know about TRWs. But, as I said in another reply, even the weather presentation has changed.....for the worse as far as I'm concerned.

So.....good luck to you and yours.

[CHfour]

I am sorry I offended you. It is/was not my intention of offending anyone. I just felt that everyone would know about TRWs. But, as I said in another reply, even the weather presentation has changed.....for the worse as far as I'm concerned.

So.....good luck to you and yours.

No problem DC, I'm probably being over sensitive.
Good luck to you also and keep up the postings!

[Cornish Jack]

The 'fors' and 'agins' are nicely polarised and t'was ever thus but ... am I the only one concerned about a contribution that states that (to paraphrase) "once the A/P is engaged I take my hands off the thrust levers"?
To quote an excellent training video, " remember the Airbus" - Sticky thrust lever, auto throttle reduces thrust for level-off, one comes back, the other stays put, aircraft rolls inverted, 300 plus dead, WITH HANDS ON THE LEVERS THE PF WOULD HAVE KNOWN WHAT WAS GOING ON!!! (yes, I KNOW that I was shouting - it worries me that much!!:ugh:

[bjkeates]

The PF should know what's going on anyway - as I said previously, you can see what the thrust is doing from the big gauges on the ECAM/EICAS/whatever, without the need to have a big lever moving backwards and forwards. There are people here who seem to think the word "automation" implies "enjoy the view while the aircraft does its thing".

If the PF is doing his/her job properly, they should be monitoring the level-off, part of which means making sure the A/T is doing its job correctly. If it's not, disconnect it. If you have an engine failure at altitude in the cruise, the aircraft isn't suddenly going to flip on its back without you having a chance to even blink. The same applies to the level off.

[Bullethead]

I called for Climb Thrust in a B767-300 years ago out of Hong Kong at night at MAUW and exactly that Sticky thrust lever, auto throttle reduces thrust for level-off, one comes back, the other stays put happened.

It got my attention, I quickly checked the screens and pushed the errant thrust lever back where it should have been and all was well. Back in those days I didn't keep my hand on the thrust levers but quess what, now I do, every time they are moving. It also became company policy some years later.

As an aside, one reason I like having moving thrust levers is that it makes it a little easier to monitor the performance of both the autopilot and the guy sitting next to you.

Regards,
BH.

[bjkeates]

On this subject, there's a further point I'd make - this is a genuine question, I don't know the answer...

Talking about thrust not coming back from climb power in the level off, for example; in A/T systems with moving thrust levers, doesn't the fact that the thrust lever needs to move potentially cause a problem in that if the thrust lever is physically stuck (jammed mechanism, FOD in the lever slots, etc), the thrust can't retard even if the A/T is commanding it? Or does the A/T system allow for the lever position to be over-ridden if it detects such a fault?

On a system with non-moving thrust levers, despite the fact that other parts of the system could still theoretically cause an error, the potential for the stuck thrust lever problem is eliminated.

[AutoAbort]

Airfoilmod

I try to rephrase. Since my first language is not English or American, what I tried to convey was that probably I am considered OK in managing and handling the aircraft and its systems, even if the autothrottles fail:) and with a little bit of luck even land the thing.

Maybe I've seen Top Gun too many times.

Best Regards

AutoAbort

[AutoAbort]

FOD in the lever slots, etc), the thrust can't retard even if the A/T is commanding it? Or does the A/T system allow for the lever position to be over-ridden if it detects such a fault?

If the thrust lever is stuck, Happens sometimes on the 146/AVRO. (Simply freezes if there is moisture in the cables) It will remain stuck and A/T not be able to control, and unless it unfreezes as you descend into warmer tempertures you may have to shut down the engine. (At least there are 3 left)

AA

[Bullethead]

bjkeates

On all the autothrottle equipped aircraft I have flown, manually positioning the thrust levers will always override the autothrottle. So a jammed thrust lever would be a real problem.

Regards,
BH.

[bjkeates]

Thanks for your replies, guys. Best regards.

[8che]

oh Exteme P,

Nice shameless copy and paste of Bulfer and Gifford page 119 I believe !

Perhaps you could mention their name next time you use it.

The one main advantage of moving autothrottle levers is that it allows you to instintly see what the automatics are asking or not asking the aircraft to do (when holding them). Much better feel than a command thrust presentation. Particularly good in determining whether its going to handle the next speed variation or windshear on approach that you know is coming but it doesnt.

The need to know philosophy difference between Airbus and Boeing is surprising. I still cannot believe Airbus get away with not letting the Pilot know when an autopilot degradation occurs ie no aileron control but no message in the Russian crash.

[Flaperon777]

Bj,
With the A/T engaged its the computers that move the thrust levers and not the other way around.That....I hope should answer your query.
IF for some reason the thrust lever is forced into an uncommanded position(as in maybe held into a position physically),the levers sense the 'suggestion',inform the computers and if nothing changes for a given period of time,they go into a "soft manual" mode or 'Thr hold' position.Wherein all protections are still available,but the levers would stay in the last commanded manual position.
Hope this helps....

[bjkeates]

Flaperon, yes that answers the question. Thanks very much.

[BelArgUSA]

You have my entire sympathy with your arguments against the generation of adepts of auto-thrust and other forms of "push-button magic" aircraft systems. And like you, I recently did hang my hat and uniform to log LH "Rocking Chair" time from my balcony on a lovely beach.
xxx
Funny is, when you and I started flying with airlines, we had to have very similar disagreements with our, then captains, who painfully had transitioned from their DC-6/7 or L-1049 to our B-707 and 727s. (I was PanAm). With a smile, I recall some captains who held their hands grabbed on the thrust levers (they called "throttles") through the entire takeoff roll and initial climb. Removing hands from thrust, at V1...? Anatheme...! They would even call the climb thrust reduction "METO POWER". So, what do we look like to today's intellectuals of automation in the cockpits... Can they really "fly" a plane...?
xxx
My last airplane type was the old 747 Classic... 1989-2008, which had auto-land and auto-thrust capability. As to using these, was rather unusual, except if engineering-maintenance wanted us to check the operational status of these toys. I rarely used "German" automation technology ("OTTO" approaches), as we, in South America much prefer "MANUEL" practice, to just verify that we still deserve our pilot proficiency status and currency... Unfortunately, I firmly believe that a few recent accidents would have been avoided, would the crew have elected to fly their machines by hand.
xxx
I would love to subject today's fATPL-clad kids going through a SIM P/C, say in a DC8-63 (I flew these as well) in a "quick-and-dirty" 20 minutes check, with a mere...
(1) First takeoff, engine failure nº 4 at V1 - to
(2) 3-engine hand-flown ILS down to 100' DH - to
(3) Missed approach with ENG FIRE on nº 3 - to
(4) 2-engine NDB, 10 kts XWIND with "lenient" visual conditions at 500' above TDZE.
xxx
I would tell him - "parking brake ON - you passed..."
Is it not the way we could do...?
No need to verify your qualifications in selecting the OTTO-pilot.
Certain, guys with Rosenbalm or Kalitta were able to do it, with colors.
xxx
Best regards -
:ok:
Happy contrails

[Tee Emm]

The last 10 on a B733 with everything and I feel my management of flight is far superior than the good old days of "stick and rudder". I make better decisions and use less fuel with help from the automatics. Understanding what the aircraft is capable of and how to best manage the autoflight to achieve that is the key.

The tragedy is you become so reliant on the automatic "goodies" that you gradually lose the confidence and skills required to actually fly the aeroplane. The more you lose that confidence the more you rely on the automatics even for the most basic manoeuvres until finally you are led to believe in your own mind that manipulative skills are not only not applicable to flying jet transports but indeed it is potentially dangerous to attempt hand flying.

In the simulator we frequently observe experienced captains and cadet first officers make an absolutely embarrassing hash of a straight forward IMC raw data hand flown ILS. Few are able to touch down with no drift on a crosswind landing. But watch them "monitor" the automatics on a Cat 3 and they are in their element.

It is the wonderful reliability of automatics that has made airline flying safer over the years - not the skill of the crews per se. CFIT has been overtaken by Loss of Control as the major cause of accidents in the past few years and this is entirely because manipulative skills have been eroded by policies that ensure automatics are to be engaged at the earliest opportunity after lift off and left engaged until that last few seconds before touch down. Even simulator sessions are primarily an automatics exercise with very little time allotted to ensure excellent manipulative skills. And so the vicious circle is maintained.

If you believe that an airline pilot should be equally skilful at automatic flight and at manual flight, then think again. Because very rarely do we see this in the simulator and certainly hardly ever in the air.

[DC-ATE]

BelArgUSA - Tee Emm -

Thank you both for your input. You are both absolutely correct in your thoughts. Unfortunately, like I've said in other threads, I feel we're just banging our heards up against a stone wall with the "new" generation of "automated" pilot. That is not to say they're ALL like that, but you know what I mean. "Automation" and "Technology" are gonna do us in, I fear.

BelArgUSA, enjoy your retirement; I know I am. That is 'till the $$ runs out!

[jb5000]

I am looking forward to the day when I can look back at my career and smugly state how I am much better than any of the 'new generation'. It's going to be great!

Wasn't this a thread about Autothrottles? I forget... (Must be getting old already!)

[bjkeates]

You are both absolutely correct in your thoughts.They are good and well-articulated points of the discussion, but 'correct' is a matter of opinion in this case. What you mean is "I agree", surely?

Unfortunately, like I've said in other threads, I feel we're just banging our heards up against a stone wall with the "new" generation of "automated" pilot.Maybe we could say the same about trying to break through this barrier of patronising, condescending views of 'older generation' pilots who look down on those of us who fly modern aircraft with their modern 'toys', as you crudely put it. I'm always ready to engage in constructive debate and the genial nature of your posts suggests you are too, which is great; but then you throw in a comment like "let these boys play with their toys", which makes me wonder why we even bother having these discussions.

[downwindabeam]

I personally cannot believe the words some pilots here are writing. Since when holding 180kts and joining an ILS a problem that you need auto throttles or autopilots for???

Jesus what have we come to?

All this lawyer mumbo jumbo... "I look to see if its safe to me to take my hand off my and put it somewhere else.... " for real?

Seriously gentlemen, you have elected to be pilots, mentally return to your 172 days and put your hands on the throttle and join that needle and slope. It's not that hard even if you need to say "Gear down" .... "Flaps X...", not a big deal!

Maybe even try a 250kts to the marker some time, it will do wonders to how much you know about your airplane. Maybe even try to see if you know what kind of a pitch attiude it takes to level your airplane at 200kts, at 180 and first flap application, how about at 250... do you know what those attitude targets are?

[DC-ATE]

Please.....I am NOT looking down on anyone! Nor am I trying to "prove" that I, or "my generation" is/was any better. I am merely TRYING to point out some possible flaws in the system. Flaws that have been documented on occasion. Flaws that no one seems willing to accept. Read that report on the link I posted.

I hope ALL you active pilots can look back at your career someday with satisfaction of a "job well done". Was I lucky, proficient, average, good, or what: who knows. All I know is I "survived" 30 years of flying these things without ever having scratched anything.

Keep your EPRs, RPMs, BMEPs, or whatever you use...UP!

[EpsilonVaz]

downwindabeam, I don't think anyone is saying that it's a "problem", Instead, that A/T can free up mental capacity to do other jobs, especially is you are fatigued, and this increases overall operational safety. At the end of the day, a safe operation is what you are employed to perform.

I am not condoning loss of handling skill, I believe that it is prudent to practice handling at every opportunity you get, as long as it is safe to do so. In cases where you are tired on a 4th sector, and other things are going on (ie, cabin not ready, etc.), A/T is a welcome feature to help you perform your operation. Of course, if for some reason the A/T was inop, you should still be able to deal with it all without issue. Safety first, not ego, or "tradition". I drive an automatic car because for me, it's function is to get me from A to B in comfort and least hassle possible. Some people prefer manual cars because they enjoy the more "hands on" experience. I am not employed to enjoy my job (however I do thoroughly), I am paid to get paying passengers from A to B safely and efficiently, any feature that enhances my ability to do that, is more than welcome. Of course, none of that is any excuse to let your manual competence degrade.

On a separate note, I do plan to start some aerobatics lessons shortly, as I really did enjoy the "real hands on flying" experience.

[AutoAbort]

Actually I did my intial training on the DC8 when I joined SAS. Unfortunately only the simulator. Would have loved to fly the real airplane because it was a joy to fly. BUT I think most of us agree that there is no way back to the technology of those days, and if you are suggesting that todays aircraft systems have evolved in a not so optimum way and are leaving the pilot out of the loop maybe it is becoming a nostalgic trip? Evolution is going on as we speek. A380 shows vertical profile on ND, cameras for external view, more composite materials, Entertainment systems omboard are lightyears from before, Datalink is used more and more for communication. Others are experimenting with synthetic vision, airborne radar to detect clear air turbulence. I have heard rumours about Auto takeoff! Free flight will come and by then the "pilot" will probably have to accept a computer generated ATC scenario displayed on the aircraft screens and we just watch and monitor, but i am sure he can still do a manual ILS if necessary, without any problem. Maybe it is not as "fun" as earlier days but the public, economy,safety and the society will demand such as system to make it work at all when we are 12 bilion people who all want to travel to the other side of the world to get some variation to their normal summer vacation week on the Canary Islands. Am I worried about the future? He## NO I am eagerly looking forward to it and will enjoy every step of progress and try to adapt to it.
On the other hand I love to visit Aviaion museums as well.:)

rgrds to all

AutoAbort

[DC-ATE]

I'm sorry you didn't get a chance to fly the 'real' DC-8. While sims are good, actual aircraft fly better.

I fully realize there is 'no turning back' in technology. I merely tried to point out where mistakes CAN take place because of this new technolgy. If all you have is 'straight' flight controls and throttle(s), and something goes wrong, it's faily obvious what it is and you deal with it. There just seem to be too many variables with the newer system to get a grasp of what is actually happening and then being able to deal with it.

Nuff said.....

[BelArgUSA]

Well, Pprune Friends -
xxx
Nearly 20 years ago, an acquaintance in California invited me for a ride in his DC-3, and told me to sit in the RH seat. I flew it straight and level for about 5-10 minutes or so, but would not have had a clue as to what to do if he became incapacitated...! Bunch of handles and gages I did not know...!
xxx
Last year, I rode one of our A-340 to Barcelona, and was in the cockpit for takeoff and landing, and spent an hour in cruise "completely lost" as to all the toys to be found. Again, would the pilots have been incapacitated, I would have impressed myself to find the "press to talk" switch (if any), and with my luck, disconnected the autoflight systems, with no hope to recover.
xxx
What is this...? Generation gap, definitely. Add to this a severe case of alzheimer, and advanced senility. I guess those of you kids who play with FS Microsoft simulators at home would know more about how to fly a A-340 than me. Oh - stop it... I could read the altimeter...
xxx
Leave me in my passenger seat, in the cabin, enjoying wines and lobster, and the smile of the few flight attendants who did not forget my name. Oh, do not worry, I keep my Super Cub VFR type rating current. I could even finance line training in it, and its FMC is not beyond my IQ level. Will ask if an auto-throttle is an option on L-21s, I might install one, you guys made me jealous.
xxx
All the best to the new generation.
:D
Happy contrails

[WindSheer]

DC-ATE

Going back to your original post!
The crash mentioned was a 737 with fully moving thrust levers, why bring up the airbus type operation?

[DC-ATE]

If you're referring to my initial post, I don't see where I mentioned Airbus. I know the Turkish one was a 737-800.

[Tee Emm]

DC-ATE:
I believe you are dead right to ponder the steadily increasing gap between those pilots that are locked into the wonders of automatics and those enthusiastic airmen who remain convinced of the vital flight safety importance of manipulative skills. Someone in an earlier post said that it's fine to keep your hand in at hand flying but only when it is safe to do so.

Perhaps the writer really meant that his own flying skills were so eroded that it was too risky for him to "practice" his hand flying lest he makes a complete idiot of himself or scare the first officer who undoubtedly would have been brainwashed into thinking hand flying was a potential Mayday situation.

You will never beat current automation for sheer accuracy. But in my experience in airline flying there are plenty of opportunities to keep up your hand flying raw data skills so necessary for the time you will really need them. Commonsense should dictate when the time is not appropriate to do this. If you get time, read the accident report on the Adam Air (indonesia) Boeing 737 that crashed after breaking apart during an attempted recovery in IMC from a steep rolling dive.

In a nutshell, the crew were apparently so engrossed in trouble-shooting an faulty IRS that they failed to notice the autopilot had disconnected as a consequence of their trouble shooting. Worse still, the crew failed to notice or failed to act when the 737 slowly banked into a spiral dive. With a modicum of basic piloting skills the captain could have easily righted the aircraft well before the situation got deadly serious. According to the accident report neither pilot had received simulator training on unusual attitude recovery technique.

In a similar accident in the Middle East, the crew became disorientated during a night departure in a 737 resulting in the aircraft crashing into the sea from a rolling diving extreme attitude. It seems from the transcript from the final moments of the CVR the captain was continually screaming for the automatic pilot to be re-connected. That tells you something about the insidious nature of blind reliance on automatics regardless of the impending situation.

As a long since retired (age 60 rule had me by the balls, sad to say) military and airline pilot, and now a simulator instructor, I see the steady erosion of flying skills due to the full on concentration for automatics competency. The headlong haste to plug in the automatic pilot as soon as the aircraft is airborne is patently obvious. But is it so necessary right then? Some argue it is safer in order to give time for the captain to "manage." That is a personal viewpoint that I have a problem with.

I have seen pilots in the simulator conducting practice circuits and landings for training purposes. The majority use the full automatics to fly a simple circuit. In my view that is a waste of simulator time. I have seen the same pilots design a MAP series of waypoints that would make Picasso proud of the design - and all for a bloody visual circuit. Then they lock themselves on to the flight director and never look outside and become flying robots as they fiddle with various modes downwind, base and final, then with a deep breath and the sign of the cross, they click off the automatic pilot and roller coast their way down through the remaining few hundred feet of glide slope.

Sad, really.

'Nuff said.

[Flaperon777]

@ Tee Emm for posts #66 and #78........:ok::ok::ok:
From me.....:D:D:D.
Well said.....!!

[DC-ATE]

Tee Emm (http://www.pprune.org/members/145362-tee-emm) -

Thank you for your post.

You are so right, and you're right; it's so sad. I've never been happier to be away from something (even my 'ex') in my life!

It seems many today are unwilling to except the fact that they might be called upon to exercise actual flying skills some day to save their airplane. I had to do exactly that on a training flight one night with a "Captain/Instructor" in the Left Seat. He did NOT know how to get out of the situation we were in, and I was transitioning into my first jet aircraft! I'm glad I was able to call upon basic flying skills to not have my family and friends read about it in an accident report.

Unfortunately, as I've spreculated in the past; it's only a matter of time before drones will be carrying the people around the World anyway, so why bother teaching pilots anything?

[Denti]

I have to agree there, it is not about the plane and the automatics that come with it. It is more a question about attitude towards your job and flying in general. And quite often it is a big question about the attitude of management pilots who define how the planes have to be operated in a certain company.

In the outfit i flew in for the last 8 years it was encouraged to do raw data no-automatic approaches and departures and raw data manual flying was part of every SIM exercise, including of course raw data manual one engine out flying. Of course you could spot the difference between those that often switched it off and those that did not. Never had a problem there, but then i started flying at the age of 12 in glider planes.

[EGPFlyer]

If you don't mind a non-pro asking a question...

Do any companies require pilots to fly manually on the line on any kind of regular basis for precisely the reason Alpagueur320 gives? Or is it entirely at the captain's discretion? Could you always fly with automatics with obvious exception of take-off and disconnect for landing?

Also, if the throttles do not move on the Airbus when the A/T is engaged, when you disconnect them does N1 not "jump" to the thrust indicated by the manual position of the levers? Hope that question makes sense.

Our Ops Manual (UK low cost) says that you should make full use of the automatics where apropriate but equally should maintain manual flying skills.

To disconnect the autothrust on an airbus you can either line up the thrust lever position indicator with the curent thrust and then disconnect or else close the thrust levers (this will disconnect the autothrust) and then put them quickly to the desired thrust position before the engines have a chance to spool down.

[DC-ATE]

I'm curious why Airbus elected to go with non-moving throttles while in auto, vs moving. What is the logic? I didn't like the description of the transfer from auto to manual thrust.

[Dan Winterland]

Airbus thought they weren't necessary. At first, on the 'bus, I was sceptical. But after several thousand hours, I'm in agreement. The levers are technically a switch. You move them into the detent of the thrust regulation required, and the fact they don't move when you press a button is inconsequential. In fact, setting your thrust limit by moving a lever in the correct sense is more logical than pressing a button. (I only ever found one pilot who could explain that Boeing THR button adequately!)

And when want to use the thrust manually, they become regular thrust levers.


But the best autothrust system I've ever used was on the VC10. The Flight Engineer had his own set of thrust levers on his desk and would set the thrust, or fly a speed that you asked for. And it was proactive. On a check ride, you briefed the engineer to give you the setting you needed, which wasn't necessarily the one you asked for! The only snag was that the systrem was expensive. Some of the FEs could drink a lot of beer!

[DC-ATE]

Sounds like a good system on the L-1011. And yes.....ah, Lockheed. I only have experience in the 'better' Lockheeds tho...Connie and Electra!

I'd still like someone to respond on the Airbus system.

[411A]

Ok, a astute observation about autothrust...and of course it is on the L1011.
On this airplane, two channels of autothrust, with (as I recall, eight accelerometers )for each channel, both channels active during automatic approach/land (autoland) ops.
The autothrust system is very accurate, especially during windshear occurances.
Sometimes...you might see Vref+40 on appraoch, at 800agl, yet it unfailingly reduces to Vref +10, crossing the fence.

IE: the GOLD standard.
It will provide the proper thrust for all situations during approach....much better than any pilot could.
Even...411A.
Lockheed...simply built to a higher standard.
Over thirty years ago.

Ahhhh, Lockheed!!:ok:

PS: One of the reasons that the L1011 autothrust is so good...the airplane is powered by the three-shaft RollsRoyce RB.211 engine, with its superb acceleration qualities.
RollsRoyce...very good engines.
I kid you not.

PPS: The Conway was superb, as well.
Credit where credit is due.

[DC-ATE]

Dan Winterland -

OK...thanks for that. I still don't like the way EGPFlyer above described the disconnect though.

And...411A...don't know how our posts got mixed up, but.....

[Dan Winterland]

Haven't found it a problem, although the closing method isn't recommended in flight at power setting higher than idle - in my manuals anyway. The closing method is primarily for landing. The TLs are closed drung the flare (the "REATRD" call reminds you should you forget! And it's not intended as an insult!!), the AT disconnects as you would expect and want. The only time I (personally) would use it would be to power up manually after a THR IDLE descent.

The reccommended book method is to align the TLs with the AT thrust setting by aligning the TL position indicator on the EPR (V2500) or N1 (CFM56) guage, then presssing the disconnect button. this gives a seamless transition from auto to manual thrust.

[411A]

And...411A...don't know how our posts got mixed up, but.....

Not to worry, DC-ATE, I edited, then reposted, for additional info.
Yes, the 'ole L1011, although a totally analogue system, is very precise in its operation.
Is it old, and today, labor intensive?
You bet, but still produces the results, as advertised.
Doubt?
Just ask the pilot who has ever flown one.:ok:

Similar to the Electra...a pilots airplane.:)

[EGPFlyer]

Yeah I forgot to add that in. I only ever use the TL to idle method if the engines are at idle thrust. I don't actually know why I mentioned it because it wasn't really relevant to the question :)